Comments on: ATF Head on Hellerhttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/
Remember, I do this to entertain me... not you.Tue, 26 Sep 2017 21:08:43 +0000hourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.8By: Jim Whttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203177
Wed, 16 Jul 2008 01:37:50 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203177The original english law he is referring to was almost exactly the same as modern laws in open carry states that forbid “going armed to the terror of the public” and similar such language. The idea is that when the townspeople see a guy walking down the street dressed for a bank robbery or a war it will disturb the peace.

Note that this says nothing whatsoever about what weapons may be KEPT as opposed to carried in public.

]]>By: Jim Whttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203175
Wed, 16 Jul 2008 01:35:14 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203175I’d be perfectly happy to not carry my machine guns so long as I am able to own them and keep them at home.
]]>By: Lylehttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203172
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:14:30 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203172Give F Troop a break. If the 2nd were strictly enforced, they’d all be unemployed.

I say buy them off. Give each of them a big severence package, say “thanks” and send them packing. Auction off all department assets. It’s the least painful way to rid ourselves of an institution that should never have existed.

]]>By: straightarrowhttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203170
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:22:00 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203170Ron W. I disagree. They should be disbanded, but should be forever prohibited from employment in any law enforcement capacity and most other government capacities.
]]>By: chrishttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203168
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:04:37 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203168i have been making the same argument about the word and for years but in a different argument…

why are we waisting all this tax money on the electric chair and lethal injections… bring back hangings and firing squads…

they might indeed be cruel… but they arent cruel andunusual… in fact they are quite common…

]]>By: DirtCrashrhttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203165
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:42:44 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203165Sullivan’s gotta go and the ATF needs to go with it. Away.
]]>By: vinniehttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203163
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:23:07 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203163I have been waiting for someone to point out that the select fire AK 47 is THE gun “in common use”.
]]>By: Ron Whttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203157
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:16:56 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203157Constitutionally, the ATF is “unusual” and dangerous to our rights. It should be disabanded and its personnel reassigned to the Border Patrol which is “usual” where they could do us some good to “protect the States against invasion” (ArticleIV, Section 4 and still be “dangerous” to those attempting to enter the U.S. illegally.
]]>By: RAHhttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203149
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:29:48 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203149At least the ATF take on Heller is better than the FBI. I am not surprised they took the interpretation that unusual and dangerous was against machine guns. I believe it was meant to assuage their fears.
]]>By: SayUnclehttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203143
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:08:08 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203143There’s apparently 6 dealers.
]]>By: kavemanhttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203142
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:05:52 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203142You see this?

5. The applicant takes his or her completed application to a licensed firearm dealer to take delivery of the pistol. If the dealer is outside the District, the dealer transports the pistol to a licensed dealer in the District to complete the transaction.

I wasn’t aware that DC had any licensed dealers besides Josh Sugarmann.

You know it occurs to me that any new technology could be banned if this dangerous or unusual meme sticks.

Exactly why we should _stop_ writing “dangerous or unusual”. That phrase occurs only once in the Heller opinion and even there it was only quoting from Miller where in Miller it was quoting from the government’s brief.

From Heller, at page 55:

We also recognize another important limitation on the
right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have
explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those
“in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. We think
that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition
of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual
weapons.”

I think the “and” is very important as it requires the weapon to be _both_ dangerous _and_ unusual. I would also take “dangerous” to mean dangerous to the user or to mean indiscriminate in effect, e.g., a hand grenade. With this reading caseless ammo would be okay. Machine guns would also be okay — they may not be “common” but there is certainly nothing particularly “unusual” _or_ “dangerous” about them.

It would seem the “in common use at the time” phrasing is subject to attack also: the first amendment certainly protects more than just what was “in common use at the time”. I am not aware of any legitimate reason the same should not apply to the second — particularly when one considers the very purpose of the second.

]]>By: 1894Chttp://www.saysuncle.com/2008/07/15/atf-head-on-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-203131
Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:46:51 +0000http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16460#comment-203131You know it occurs to me that any new technology could be banned if this dangerous or unusual meme sticks.

Unusual means different or out of the ordinary. Would a weapon that fires caseless ammunition fit such a bill? They exist but are certainly unusual….